Power Beaming For UAVs and Space Elevators

An anonymous reader writes "The idea of power beaming — using lasers or microwaves to transmit usable energy over great distances — has been around for decades. But recent advances in cheaper, more energy-efficient diode lasers have made power beaming commercially viable. LaserMotive, based in Kent, WA, is best known for winning the Level 1 prize of the NASA Power Beaming Challenge at the Space Elevator Games last November. In a new interview with Xconomy, LaserMotive co-founder Tom Nugent, who previously worked on the 'photonic fence' mosquito-zapping project at Intellectual Ventures, talks about gearing up for Level 2 of the NASA competition, slated for later this year. What's more, LaserMotive is trying to build a real business around beaming power to unmanned aerial vehicles, remote sensors and military bases, and other locations where it's impractical to run a wire, change batteries, or truck in fuel. The ultimate goal is to beam large amounts of solar power to Earth."

Comments

Beaming power down from space?

[slimjim8094]

Simple enough - just have a satellite convert it into powerful microwaves which you then beam down to reflector dishes. It works great! But you have to be careful, as occasionally the satellite gets out of whack and cooks large portions of your town.

That, or Godzilla. Unless you've turned disasters off.

Re:Beaming power down from space?

[Anonymous Coward]

Or pop lots of popcorn.

Re:Beaming power down from space?

[CRCulver]

When I read the article, I mused that the damage done by a mere misfired power beam might be nothing compared to the damage that the space elevator the beam powers might do if it falls. One of the most interesting scenes for me in Kim Stanley Robinson's novel Red Mars was the vision of the descent of a Mars space elevator after it is severed from the asteroid it is tethered to: a white hot ribbon of carbon lacerating the entire circumference of the planet, even wrapping around twice for added damage if it is long enough.

It's a bit sobering to think that even if mankind solved the plague of nuclear weapons, there's new ways to rain down mass destruction from orbit.

Re:Beaming power down from space?

[silentcoder]

>I mean really, what could go wrong when sending massive amounts of energy through the air?

Well looking at an existing experiment doing just that... a random planet can have multiple elements starting to behave in highly abherent ways, self-replicate, become self-aware and call itself "life" ? You do realize that, that is exactly what the sun does every single day right ?

Re:Sounds cool

[Tangentc]

I don't think they're really being that marginalized. The Constellation program (which I assuming is the source of most of the marginalization talk) wasn't making effective use of money and wasn't delivering much. But with no plans to replace it (at least that I've heard of) manned space travel definitely seems to be being put on the back burner.

Beyond that though, holding competitions like this is a great use of their budget. The rewards they give are relatively small compared to what it would take to develop the technology in house, and it gets companies that are flirting with the idea of developing space-related tech to produce when they might otherwise not, because the monetary reward lowers the financial risk of developing it.

Ultimate goal?

[FiloEleven]

The ultimate goal is to beam large amounts of solar power to Earth

Isn't that handled by...y'know...the sun?

Please at least attempt to be serious

[dbIII]

It's not 1963 anymore.
We've got these things called integrated circuits and microprocessors now that meant we're using high purity silicon in bulk and the price has fallen to the point that solar cells are in cheap novelty garden lights.
I suggest "checking" again.
I don't really understand where the "lifespan" thing comes from since there's still panels from the 1970s running. Please elaborate and tell me what modes of failure make you think they have a short lifespan?

A noble effort, but...

[hyades1]

"Tom Nugent...previously worked on the 'photonic fence' mosquito-zapping project at Intellectual Ventures..."

I understand the photonic fence project hit a wall during tests held just North of Winnipeg. Three mosquitoes (described by locals as "undersized" and "early season weaklings") came out of the bush, trashed the equipment and kicked the living shit out of two researchers. A German Shepherd-Pit Bull cross brought in to keep bears out of the scientists' camp was dragged off by the insects and never seen again.

Re:A noble effort, but...

[hey!]

Was I the only one who read that as Ted Nugent?

In any case, I worked in the mosquito control field for years, and his claims for the fence were not only bogus, they were *typically* bogus: " The system is 'so precise that it can specify the species, and even the gender, of the mosquito being targeted.'"

Right. That's one of the standard claims of the mosquito control crackpot. People have been making this claim for decades, but there's only one known way to identify a mosquito species: you put the specimen under a microscope and have somebody trained in mosquito taxonomy study it. This is done *routinely* by mosquito control districts who set up trap networks to assess human exposure. A system that could identify mosquito species electronically in real time would be worth tens of millions of dollars per year in the US alone.

If he could prove that one capability alone, I'd gladly mortgage my house for a stake in a business to produce *just the identification piece* -- much less the mosquito killing laser. But it's obviously the kind of claim a crackpot would make. I'm not saying that it is physically impossible to do what he claims, but it is so far beyond the capability of current technology that I'd have to conclude this guy is a crackpot.

Whaaa! I demand guaranteed success!!!!

[rts008]

If everyone had your attitude, we would still be living in caves in Africa.

Don't push the boundaries, and stay in your mom's basement for all I care.
But your display of your lack of adventure/exploration/curiosity paints you into a corner from my view.

*hyperbole warning*
Real men with balls are explorers, always pushing the boundaries.
Real men have the balls to attempt and fail, learning something, and trying again.
Real men don't give up until they see their vision through, or die.
*end hyperbole*

Humans are renowned for their curiosity, and the mental capacity to satisfy that inherit curiosity.

Therefore, by my straw-man reasoning, I have deduced that you are subhuman. ;-)

Your type contribute nothing to our world. You're just leeches; a detriment to our society/species/world.

Win or lose, you should applaud their effort[or turn in your geek/nerd card and STFU]. We all benefit, directly, or indirectly.

There is a reason Star Trek had such an affect on society/industry/science.

"To boldly go where no man has gone before.."

That appealed directly to our species sense of adventure/curiosity.

     

Re:Sounds cool

[HungryHobo]

From:
http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/428439main_Space_technology.pdf

"The return on investment with prizes is exceptionally high as NASA expends no funds unless the
accomplishment is demonstrated."

Am I the only one thinking that perhaps they should structure more government contracts like this?
With a focus on "expends no funds unless the accomplishment is demonstrated".

Which I would have thought should be a requirement for all government contracts but sadly is not.

It increases the risk to the companies involved but that just means you need to make the winnings pot a decent size.

Stop fucking around with these tiny little prizes of 1 or 2 million dollars and offer pots that would make a venture capitalist salivate( like 500 million dollars for the bellow)

"put at least one human being on the moon and bring him back to earth safely and collect *list of samples* and place *list of scientific equipment* on the lunar surface"

For comparison:
the space shuttle: 115 missions (as of 6 August 2006) - total cost $150 billion

at the moment prize pots seem to always be trivial quantities of money compared to the rest of the budget.